Accessing Pension Fund - Advice needed

atush

Alf, can you not read?

Covered in point 2 above you. And only proposed, not law and has huge hurdles and is still unlikely to be in the best interests of the annuitant as they would be sold at a substantial discount.

mgdavid

atush wrote: »

Alf, can you not read?

Covered in point 2 above you. And only proposed, not law and has huge hurdles and is still unlikely to be in the best interests of the annuitant as they would be sold at a substantial discount.

hardly even proposed - more a glint in Steve Webb's eye, it may not even get as far as his wishlist. It certainly isn't pledge or policy of any of the parties.

mgdavid

agarnett wrote: »

Is the thread topic so far not affected by this other news ?

No, for reasons stated elsewhere.

agarnett

Here we go again.

All over a simple question like a rash.

jem16 - I don't think you've grasped this one yet, have you?

atush - the language of point 2. above meant I did not realise it alluded to the same news. To interpret point 2. above my last post, you first have to know what was meant by a 'pension income stream' and who was likely to be selling one! I thought annuity providers already did that!

So, a second hand pension in payment market ? With all the other debt that gets traded in so may guises, would such a wheeze even need a law to be enacted?

I guess so, but the machinery for valuing what remains of a DB pension already in payment is already well tested isn't it? When DB schemes are wound up, isn't that exactly what happens?

I suppose all it requires is a tweak with some calculation of a suitable discount that removes the detriment to continuing scheme members when other members bail out early, taking wedges with them to enjoy under their favorite palm tree

So why is it such an unlikely possibility? Equality rules. And commercial interests certainly do! We can't have younger members getting better deals than seniors, just because flexibility to enjoy your own cash is a new idea that has somehow past them by, now can we? Especially if it suits pension trustees and corporates to shed some liabilities at a discount :rotfl:

Party Pledge or Policy ? Not yet, but do use your loaves while they are still fresh!

jem16

agarnett wrote: »

jem16 - I don't think you've grasped this one yet, have you?

I've grasped it perfectly thanks.

However why give the OP false hope that she can do something that she cannot.

agarnett

Oh so we have guardians of the national hope lurking in these forums now? :rotfl:

Why do you think the Telegraph report of Steve Webb's musings is so hopeless?

Doesn't everyone have their price ?

You can certainly have my DB scheme for a price - the way the company's fortunes have gone lately, and the junk they and JLT seem to have invested us in, it'll soon be 10% less than I hoped under administration of PPF. Part Pledge or Fallacy? Does that mean I once had false hopes for a decent retirement too ? Surely not?

hyubh

agarnett wrote: »

Why do you think the Telegraph report of Steve Webb's musings is so hopeless?

I question that makes an assumption a reasonable person may not hold... Personally I find Telegraph pension pieces to be usually more sensationalist and (ignoring headlines) less concerned with reporting the actual facts of the matter than tabloid ones.

Doesn't everyone have their price ?

You can certainly have my DB scheme for a price - the way the company's fortunes have gone lately, and the junk they and JLT seem to have invested us in, it'll soon be 10% less than I hoped under administration of PPF. Part Pledge or Fallacy? Does that mean I once had false hopes for a decent retirement too ? Surely not?

You think? Surely so? Great or rubbish?

gadgetmind

Don't feed the troll.

agarnett

gadgetmind wrote: »

Don't feed the troll.

And may we take that as the closest we are going to get to an intelligent comment from Jack who is alright?

I didn't think you had any involvement in DB schemes, gadgetmind? I've been in three. I've never willingly transferred out of any. I remain now in one only, and it has been tinkered with. You?

Clearly it is inequitable for all those in a DB scheme to continue to be locked in just because it is DB, and especially as they might just have resigned themselves to accepting what the tinkered-with machine spits out at retirement, whilst all around us, other pension ringfences are now being torn down so completely that the prospect is putting large smiles on the faces of people like you as you approach your 55th? You've said it, chum.

You haven't quite told us that you had your cake and you also plan on eating it, but I think that sums you up fairly well in the pensions context?

So why not tell us your own views on the fairness of keeping all that DB funding dosh earmarked for others retirements locked up tight, whilst you get to gaily play with yours with ever increasing freedoms you never even imagined you'd get from HMG? Why can't DB scheme members have cake and eat it too?

xylophone

You can certainly have my DB scheme for a price

See http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-2700019/Key-points-Governments-pension-freedom-plans.html

concerning DB pensions and the Budget 2014 reforms.